Jens, are the comments from Ted here enough to apply the series? Or do we need a formal Acked-by to be on the safe side? On Tue, May 03, 2022 at 02:35:59PM -0700, tytso wrote: > On Tue, May 03, 2022 at 10:13:34PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Tue, May 03, 2022 at 04:06:28PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > > > Ted, does the SPDX tag match your original licensing decision back then, > > > > or do we need to correct it? Does the auto-converted tag on the loop.h > > > > SPDX header (GPL1.0 or later with syscall exception) make sense, or > > > > should that have been GPL2 only with syscall exception? > > > > > > I think you've removed the loop.h in the patch series, so it shouldn't > > > matter what the tag would be for loop.h, right? In any case, GPLv2 > > > only was certainly the intent at the time. > > > > Well, there were two loop.h files - drivers/block/loop.h gets removed > > in this series, but include/uapi/linux/loop.h stays. > > Ah, thanks for the clarification. Yes, GPLv2 with the syscall > extension is what would be appropriate for include/uapi/linux/loop.h. > > - Ted ---end quoted text---
